A83 (Rest and Be Thankful) (PE1540)
Our next item of business is consideration of five continued petitions. The first continued petition is PE1540 by Douglas Philand on a permanent solution for the A83. Members have a note by the clerk and a submission from Transport Scotland that sets out the response to the questions. We had asked for more information, including future mitigation works that are planned and more details on the economic impacts of road closures. Transport Scotland has indicated that it expects to write again to the committee in the new year.
Can we keep the petition open until we get that response in the new year from Transport Scotland?
I agree with that, but a year is a long time, so we should also ask Transport Scotland when in the new year we can expect that response.
Do we agree with those suggestions?
Members indicated agreement.
Residential Care (Severely Learning-disabled People) (PE1545)
The next petition is PE1545, by Ann Maxwell, on behalf of the Muir Maxwell Trust, on residential care provision for the severely learning disabled. The last time that we considered this petition, we agreed to seek further information on issues including improving data on people with profound and multiple learning disabilities and the adequacy of guidance issued to social workers on assessing need. The petitioner’s submission notes the differences in service provided to people under 18 and those over 18 and she suggests that one option could be to expand the services provided for under-18s at Donaldson’s College. Colleagues, do you have any views?
We should ask whether that option is realistic, given that it is a solution that has been raised. It may be impractical for a variety of reasons but it would be remiss of us not to at least venture down one possible route to see whether it is feasible.
Yes. Do members agree?
If we write to the Scottish Government, I suggest that we refer it to the Muir Maxwell Trust submission. A couple of issues were raised in the submission on which I want to seek further guidance from the Scottish Government or a further indication of its views. Those issues relate to the independent care needs assessments being conducted by local authorities and whether the Scottish Government has considered an appeals process.
A number of individuals have raised concerns about care needs assessments being done by local authorities, the right of appeal against those decisions, and whether the local authorities are making the best judgments in relation to care needs assessments at a local level. The services that are being asked for in the petition are decided by local authorities, and local authorities then determine whether they will fund placements in establishments such as Donaldson’s. It would be useful to find out whether the Scottish Government is considering a review or has reviewed the current procedures for care assessments.
Members do not seem to be opposed to that idea, so we will take the petition forward on that basis.
Electric Shock and Vibration Collars (PE1555)
Our next petition is PE1555, by Siobhan Garrahy, on electric shock and vibration collars for animals. The Scottish Government’s response indicates that it intends to carry out a consultation on the regulation of the use of e-collars. I invite contributions.
I would be quite happy to close the petition, given that we are getting a guarantee from the Government that it will consult on the use of the collars.
I am more minded to wait and see what the consultation arrives at. We could then decide whether the issues that the petition raises have been addressed.
I am of the same mind as the convener. I would like details from the Scottish Government about the consultation time period—when the Government expects to consult, when the consultation will be concluded and when any reports arising from that consultation will be produced. The Government says that it will consult, but that does not provide specific answers on a timetable. If we close the petition, the petitioner could resubmit the petition at a later date. However, I would rather get some details now from the Scottish Government about the consultation timescales and procedure.
Yes. I am sure that everyone welcomes the consultation, but that is not the end of the matter.
I endorse all that. The petition called for a ban on the collars, not a consultation on their use. I would like to know more about the scale and breadth of the consultation before we decide what to do.
We have a consensus. David?
I am happy to go along with the committee.
We will keep the petition open on that basis and take it forward.
Convener, I think that the committee hopes that you will write to the Scottish Government asking it when exactly the consultation will take place and how long it will run for.
And with whom it will consult.
Yes. I think that that is what we have agreed to do. Thank you.
National Parks Strategy (PE1556)
The next petition is PE1556, by John Mayhew, on behalf of the Scottish Campaign for National Parks and the Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland, on a national parks strategy for Scotland. The Government’s response sets out its view on the petition and answers questions that we asked. Our questions covered assessment of future sustainability of existing national park authorities, governance models and the creation of a national park strategy group. Have colleagues had a chance to look at this?
The letter from the minister is encouraging. There is clearly on-going dialogue between the Scottish ministers and the SCNP and the APRS, although the minister highlights the issue of cost as possibly being a temporary barrier, so it is not that this is unfinished business, as the SCNP report suggests.
However, as there seems to be a lack of consensus among the stakeholders on the petitioner’s aims, I think that there needs to be a greater meeting of minds to ensure that the protection and enhancing of Scotland’s wild landscapes is progressed. I suggest that we close the petition in the hope that the petitioner’s good work will continue. I certainly encourage him to work with the stakeholders identified in the unfinished business report. The Government has clearly not closed the door on the issue either. There is more work to be done, but the door is still open.
Thank you. Do members agree?
Members indicated agreement.
Animal Welfare (Rabbits) (PE1561)
The final continued petition is PE1561, by Karen Gray, on behalf of Rabbits Require Rights Scotland, on pet rabbit welfare. The submissions from animal welfare groups concur on there being a general issue about rabbit welfare and the Scottish Government’s response addresses each of the points that are identified in the petition. It also notes that the welfare of pet rabbits will be considered as part of its wider review of pet welfare legislation. Are colleagues happy with that or are we in the same position as with the previous petition—do we want to wait and see what the outcome of that review will be?
Once again, it is a question of the timescale. We need to know what the Government intends to do and how quickly it intends to do it. That will either indicate when the Government will introduce improved legislation or give us a clear steer on how the Government intends to move forward on animal welfare legislation.
To some extent, the situation is the same as it was for the previous petition. I welcome the Government’s position in its response. The petitioner having raised the issue, the committee having written to the Government and indeed the other animal welfare agencies having indicated that there seems to be an issue, some clarity from the Government would be welcome as to timescale, whether the review will include this issue and whether the Government will engage, at least to some extent, with the petitioner.
As on the previous occasion, although people who are looking casually at our deliberations might wonder about the issue of rabbit or pet welfare—indeed, I see that there is a submission from a Best4Bunny.com website—when we took evidence, the detail of the issue underpinning the welfare of animals was—
A very serious one.
—and very robustly made. Until we see the scope of that consultation, we should keep the issue alive.
That seems to be agreed by everyone. I close the meeting at that point.
Meeting closed at 12:38.Previous
New Petitions